AI Hallucination Cases
This database tracks legal decisions1
I.e., all documents where the use of AI, whether established or merely alleged, is addressed in more than a passing reference by the court or tribunal.
Notably, this does not cover mere allegations of hallucinations, but only cases where the court or tribunal has explicitly found (or implied) that a party relied on hallucinated content or material.
As an exception, the database also covers some judicial decisions where AI use was alleged but not confirmed. This is a judgment call on my part.
in cases where generative AI produced hallucinated content – typically fake citations, but also other types of AI-generated arguments. It does not track the (necessarily wider) universe of all fake citations or use of AI in court filings.
While seeking to be exhaustive (898 cases identified so far), it is a work in progress and will expand as new examples emerge. This database has been featured in news media, and indeed in several decisions dealing with hallucinated material.2
Examples of media coverage include:
- M. Hiltzik, AI 'hallucinations' are a growing problem for the legal profession (LA Times, 22 May 2025)
- E. Volokh, "AI Hallucination Cases," from Courts All Over the World (Volokh Conspiracy, 18 May 2025)
- J-.M. Manach, "Il génère des plaidoiries par IA, et en recense 160 ayant « halluciné » depuis 2023" (Next, 1 July 2025)
- J. Koebler & J. Roscoe, "18 Lawyers Caught Using AI Explain Why They Did It (404 Media, 30 September 2025)
And if you know of a case that should be included, feel free to contact me.3 (Readers may also be interested in this project regarding AI use in academic papers.)
Based on this database, I have developped an automated reference checker that also detects hallucinations: PelAIkan. Check the Reports 
in the database for examples, and reach out to me for a demo !
For weekly takes on cases like these, and what they mean for legal practice, subscribe to Artificial Authority.
Click to Download CSV
Last updated: 23 April 2026
| Case | Court / Jurisdiction | Date ▼ | Party Using AI | AI Tool ⓘ | Nature of Hallucination | Outcome / Sanction | Monetary Penalty | Details | Report(s) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lance J. Meyer and Kerry L. Meyer v. Castroville State Bank | Tex. App.—San Antonio (4th Dist.) (USA) | 22 April 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(2)
|
Court verified the authorities were nonexistent and declined to initiate sanctions. | — | — | |
|
The appellants' brief cited at least two authorities that did not exist; the Bank flagged the issue and the court's own research confirmed the citations were fictitious. The court noted authorities sanctioning such conduct but declined to commence sanctions proceedings.
|
|||||||||
| Alishia Monique Jones v. Ahmed Taylor, et al. | E.D. Mich. (USA) | 22 April 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(2)
|
Court warned plaintiff may be sanctioned (including dismissal) for using AI-generated fake citations; no sanction imposed at this time. | — | — | |
|
Court identified that the plaintiff cited fabricated case authorities likely generated by AI and warned that continued use could result in sanctions including dismissal. The court referenced specific fake citations and struck the amended complaint; it issued a warning but did not impose monetary or professional sanctions at this time.
|
|||||||||
| Krista C. Geddes v. LoanCare, LLC, et al. | E.D. Cal. (USA) | 22 April 2026 | Lawyer | Implied |
False Quotes
Case Law
(2)
|
Court imposed $1,000 sanction, ordered reporting to the California Bar, and required filing of a compliance notice. | 1 | — | |
|
Plaintiff (a licensed attorney proceeding pro se) included two manufactured or inaccurate quotations attributed to Kachlon v. Markowitz and Barrionuevo v. Chase Bank in supplemental briefing. Defendants alerted the court; court found the quotes were not in the opinions and that formatting (use of quotation marks) suggested intent to mislead. Court imposed monetary sanction and bar reporting. The court cautioned about generative AI use generally.
|
|||||||||
| Carol L. Williams v. Tracy Honl | Or. Ct. App. (USA) | 22 April 2026 | Lawyer | Unidentified |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
False Quotes
Case Law
(1)
Misrepresented
Case Law
(3)
|
Opening brief struck; appellant permitted to file amended brief with certification; appellant's attorneys ordered to pay respondent $8,044.25 in attorney fees; no dismissal or additional sanctions imposed. | 1 | — | |
|
Appellant's opening brief contained fabricated quotations and propositions of law falsely attributed to cases. Appellant's counsel admitted using generative AI as a research and drafting aid and failing to verify citations. The court struck the brief, required an amended brief with verification certifications if filed by the same attorney, and sanctioned the attorneys by ordering payment of respondent's attorney fees incurred responding to the fabricated authority and the court's show-cause order.
|
|||||||||
| Bunce v. Visual Technology Innovations (2) | E.D. Pennsylvania (USA) | 20 April 2026 | Lawyer | Unidentified |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
Misrepresented
Case Law
(1)
|
Monetary Sanction, Additional CLE | 5000 USD |
Motion for sanctions
|
|
|
Source: Volokh
|
|||||||||
| In re Prince Global Holdings Limited, et al. | S.D. New York (Bankruptcy) (USA) | 18 April 2026 | Lawyer | Unidentified |
Fabricated
Case Law
(2)
False Quotes
Case Law
(1)
Misrepresented
Case Law
(1)
|
Firm apologised | — | — | |
|
Sullivan & Cromwell acknowledged that its April 9, 2026 Motion contained AI-generated inaccuracies including fabricated and misquoted case citations. The firm apologized, identified and corrected the errors in Schedule A, undertook remedial measures, and filed corrected papers. The issue was brought to the firm's attention by opposing counsel (Boies Schiller Flexner). |
|||||||||
| Jamie Lee Saunders v. Albertsons/Safeway, LLC | D. Colorado (USA) | 16 April 2026 | Lawyer | Unidentified |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
|
Warning | — |
Motion for costs
|
|
|
Source: Jesse Schaefer
|
|||||||||
| Stance Strong and Kinisha Strong v. Zubha Pop Foods LLC d/b/a Popeyes Chicken | CA Illinois (1d) (USA) | 15 April 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Centient AI |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
Misrepresented
Case Law
(2)
|
Brief Struck | — | — | |
| In the Marriage of: Sarah Lynn Nelson, n/k/a Sarah Lynn Derry v. Abel Aaron Nelson | Minn. Ct. App. (USA) | 15 April 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
|
Court flagged the citation as invalid/unlocatable and noted the phenomenon of AI-generated 'hallucinated' cases; no professional sanction or monetary penalty imposed. | — | — | |
|
The opinion and editor's note identify incorrect or nonexistent citation references in the record. The court specifically could not locate 'DeMars v. DeMars, 590 N.W.2d 116, 120-21 (Minn. Ct. App. 1999)' and referenced the tendency of generative AI to produce fake cases; the invalid citations were preserved in the official record but links were removed.
|
|||||||||
| Cynthia White v. Walmart, Inc. | S.D. Indiana (USA) | 14 April 2026 | Lawyer | Unidentified |
Fabricated
Exhibits or Submissions
(1)
Misrepresented
Exhibits or Submissions
(1)
|
Warning | — | — | |
|
Source: Robert Freund
|
|||||||||
| Zand v. Sukumar | CA California (1d) (USA) | 14 April 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Exhibits or Submissions
(1)
|
— | — | ||
| Michael T-Alexander v. Michelle Baass et al. | CA California (6d) (USA) | 14 April 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
False Quotes
Case Law
(2)
|
Admonishment | — | — | |
| Brian Smith v. TD Auto Finance LLC, et al. | N.D. Mississippi (USA) | 14 April 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Unidentified |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
|
Warning | — | — | |
|
Source: Jesse Schaefer
|
|||||||||
| Shaw v. City of Portola, et al. | E.D. California (USA) | 14 April 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
Misrepresented
Case Law
(5)
|
Order to Show Cause | — | — | |
|
Source: Jesse Schaefer
|
|||||||||
| State of Ohio v. Abdullah M. Alqahtani | 3d Dist (USA) | 13 April 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
Misrepresented
Case Law
(1),
Legal Norm
(1)
|
— | — | ||
|
Source: Jesse Schaefer
|
|||||||||
| Allen v. Hunt | N.D. Illinois (USA) | 13 April 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(2)
|
Warning | — | — | |
| Bruno Roberto Rodriguez v. Kathryn Louise Rodriguez | CA Florida 6th (USA) | 10 April 2026 | Lawyer | Unidentified |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
Misrepresented
Case Law
(1)
|
Order to Show Cause | — | — | |
| Avalon Holdings Corp. v. Guy Gentile | S.D. New York (USA) | 10 April 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
|
Warning | — | — | |
| Steven Nemec v. Kelsey Kanoelani Alao and Alyssa Jade Alao | D. Oregon (USA) | 10 April 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(4)
|
— | — | ||
| Ifeoma Delliane Chinedu Obi v. Cook County, Illinois, et al. | N.D. Illinois (USA) | 9 April 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Unidentified |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
False Quotes
Case Law
(2),
Exhibits or Submissions
(1)
|
Brief Struck; Monetary Sanction | 4999 USD | — | |
|
(Sanction was initially 9,750 USD, but court later corrected the order, reducing the amount to 5000 USD. No explanation was given.) |
|||||||||
| Robert S. Hulvat v. Juli Gumina, STG Divorce Law, and Jennifer B. Hulvat | CA Illinois (3d) (USA) | 9 April 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Unidentified |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
False Quotes
Case Law
(1)
Misrepresented
Case Law
(1)
|
Monetary Sanction | 3178 USD | — | |
|
Source: Jesse Schaefer
|
|||||||||
| That Xiong v. Minga Wofford | E.D. California (USA) | 9 April 2026 | Lawyer | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(3)
|
Order to Show Cause | — | — | |
| In re Troylond Malon Wise | W.D. Louisiana (Bankruptcy) (USA) | 9 April 2026 | Lawyer | Unidentified |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1),
Legal Norm
(1)
Misrepresented
Case Law
(1)
|
Monetary sanction; CLE on AI; barred until compliance; Brief struck | 2750 USD | — | |
|
= |
|||||||||
|
Source: Jesse Schaefer
|
|||||||||
| Pleasant v. Burns | N.D. Alabama (USA) | 8 April 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
False Quotes
Case Law
(1)
Misrepresented
Case Law
(1)
|
Order to Show Cause | — | — | |
| James C. Young; Tahnee R. Young v. Happy Money | CA 8th Circuit (Bankruptcy) (USA) | 8 April 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(3)
Misrepresented
Case Law
(1)
|
— | — | ||
| Joseph C. Zoghaib v. Societe Generale De Banque Au Liban, et al. | S.D. Florida (USA) | 8 April 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Misrepresented
Case Law
(3)
|
Warning | — | — | |
| Nancy Parkinson v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review | Cmwlth Pennsylvania (USA) | 7 April 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
|
— | — | ||
| Thanh Nguy v. Jabil Inc. | N.D. California (USA) | 7 April 2026 | Lawyer | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
|
Warning | — | — | |
| Aurore Sims v. Assia Souily-Lefave; Around Vegas, LLC | D. Nevada (USA) | 7 April 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(4)
|
Warning | — | — | |
| Herbert Brooks v. Lowes Home Centers LLC | W.D. Louisiana (USA) | 7 April 2026 | Lawyer | Implied |
False Quotes
Case Law
(7)
|
Order to Show Cause | — |
Memorandum in Limine
|
|
| Blackburn v. United States | W.D. Oklahoma (USA) | 7 April 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
Misrepresented
Case Law
(5)
|
Warning | — | — | |
| Kelly Bartholomew v. Public Utility Commission of Oregon | CA Oregon (USA) | 6 April 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Unidentified |
Fabricated
Case Law
(3)
|
Judicial review dismissed due to submission of fabricated case citations | — | — | |
| James Jordan v. USA, Clinicas Del Camino Real, Inc., et al. | C.D. California (USA) | 6 April 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
False Quotes
Case Law
(1)
|
Admonishment | — | — | |
| Gamez v. County of Fresno | E.D. California (USA) | 6 April 2026 | Lawyer | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(3)
False Quotes
Case Law
(1)
Misrepresented
Legal Norm
(1)
|
Order to Show Cause | — | — | |
| Wendy Wolkenstein and Rebecca Knepp v. Dan Heinrich and Samual Tillery | D. Nevada (USA) | 6 April 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
Misrepresented
Case Law
(2)
|
Warning | — | — | |
| Hardy v. Genesee County Community Action Resource Department, et al. (2) | E.D. Mich. (USA) | 6 April 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Unidentified |
False Quotes
Case Law
(3)
|
Brief Struck | — | — | |
| Viral Bhagat v. Anuja Sharad Shah | S.D. New York (USA) | 6 April 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
|
Admonishment | — | — | |
| In re: Philips Recalled CPAP, Bi-Level PAP, and Mechanical Ventilator Products Liability Litigation (Gravelyn) | J.P.M.L. (USA) | 6 April 2026 | Lawyer | Implied |
Misrepresented
Case Law
(4)
|
Warning | — | — | |
|
Source: Jesse Schaefer
|
|||||||||
| United States v. Farris | CA 6th Cir. (USA) | 3 April 2026 | Lawyer | Westlaw CoCounsel |
Fabricated
Doctrinal Work
(1)
False Quotes
Case Law
(2)
|
Counsel disqualified with no compensation for time served; Briefs locked; Bar Referral; Notice of Opinion | — | — | |
|
Source: Robert Freund
|
|||||||||
| Najafpir v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. | N.D. California (USA) | 3 April 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
|
Claim dismissed with prejudice | — | — | |
| Ward v. Amazon.com Services LLC | W.D. Washington (USA) | 3 April 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(2)
|
Warning | — | — | |
| In re: Kathleen A Rabon | D. Connecticut (Bankruptcy) (USA) | 3 April 2026 | Lawyer | Implied |
False Quotes
Case Law
(1)
|
Show Cause Order | — | — | |
|
Source: Jesse Schaefer
|
|||||||||
| Ellen Michaelis v. Wilmington Savings Fund Society | SC Dutchess County, N.Y. (USA) | 3 April 2026 | Pro Se Litigant |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
False Quotes
Case Law
(1)
Misrepresented
Case Law
(1)
|
— | — | |||
|
Source: Jesse Schaefer
|
|||||||||
| Modern Floor Specialists, Inc. et al. v. City of Los Angeles et al. | C.D. California (USA) | 3 April 2026 | Lawyer | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
|
Order to Show Cause | — | — | |
|
Source: Jesse Schaefer
|
|||||||||
| Kevin D. Turnage v. Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., et al. | D. Arizona (USA) | 2 April 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(3),
other
(1)
Misrepresented
Legal Norm
(1)
|
Warning | — | — | |
| Stanford v. Leinart | CA Texas (USA) | 2 April 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
|
Admonishment | — | — | |
|
Source: Jesse Schaefer
|
|||||||||
| Saqib Kafeel v. Apple Inc., et al. | N.D. California (USA) | 1 April 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
|
Warning | — | — | |
| Patrick Hrdlichka v. Samantha Bengston | CA Arkansas (USA) | 1 April 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Implied |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
|
Warning | — | — | |
| In the Interest of W.G., Minor Child | CA Iowa (USA) | 1 April 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Perplexity |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
Misrepresented
Case Law
(1)
|
— | — | ||
| Evgeny Yaroshevsky v. Karlin et al. | E.D. New York (USA) | 31 March 2026 | Pro Se Litigant | Gemini |
Fabricated
Case Law
(1)
False Quotes
Case Law
(1)
Misrepresented
other
(1)
|
Recommended adverse costs order | — | — | |
|
R&R was adopted later on (see here). |
|||||||||
|
Source: Jesse Schaefer
|
|||||||||